Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP

2005-03-10 Thread John R Pierce
select 1 from tab having 1=1; returns 2 rows I'm curious whats in those two rows... {{1} {1}} ? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY

2005-03-10 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:44:50 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would those of you with access to other DBMSes try this: > On informix 9.21.UC4 > create table tab (col integer); > select 1 from tab having 1=0; > returns no rows > select 1 from tab having 1=1; > returns no rows > inser

Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP

2005-03-09 Thread Mark Shewmaker
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 21:21 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Comments? Can anyone confirm whether DB2 or other databases allow > ungrouped column references with HAVING? In Sybase: 1> select 2 as id, max(myfield) from mytable where 2=1 2> go id --- -- 2

[BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY

2005-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote in reference to bug#1528: > What the spec actually says, or at least implies, is that a HAVING > clause is to be evaluated only once per group --- where the "group" > is the whole table if there's no GROUP BY clause. In fact, reading the spec more closely, it is clear that the presence of